Heaven and Hell, the Pope condemns the poor to eternal poverty

“Only when Third World children can do homework at night using cheap coal-fired electricity can they escape from poverty.”

From the press release:

Click to buy from Connor Court Publishing

HEAVEN AND HELL: THE POPE CONDEMNS THE POOR TO ETERNAL POVERTY

by Professor Ian Plimer

The recent papal Encyclical was on climate and the environment. This book criticises the Encyclical and shows that we have never lived in better times, that cheap fossil fuel energy has and is continuing to bring hundreds of millions of people from peasant poverty to the middle class and that the alleged dangerous global warming is a myth.

I have great respect for the Pope’s sincere wishes to end pollution and poverty. We all share the same sentiments. The solution is to use cheap coal-fired electricity and not to demonise coal and other fossil fuels. The Industrial Revolution and the growth of East Asia and India shows that with cheap coal-fired electricity, people are brought out of poverty. It has happened to hundreds of millions of people over the last 20 years.

Burning coal releases CO2. This is the gas of life. Plants feed on CO2 and there has been a greening of the Earth with the slight increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. The food for all life on Earth has been wrongly demonised as a pollutant. Some 97% of CO2 emissions are natural.

It has yet to be shown that CO2 drives global warming and all models of future climate based increases in CO2 have failed. Despite hysterical predictions based on models, planet Earth has not deteriorated due to an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Nature and humans add traces of a trace gas CO2 to the atmosphere

The planet has not warmed for more than 18 years, models predicted a steady temperature increase over this time and a predicted hot spot over the equator has not eventuated. The models are not in accord with measured reality and are rejected. The science on climate change is far from settled, there is no consensus and there is no demonstrated evidence of human-induced global warming.

In the past when the Earth had a much higher atmospheric CO2 concentration than now, there was no tipping point, no run away global warming, no accelerated extinction and ecosystems thrived. When the past atmospheric CO2 content was up to 1,000 times higher than now, there were ice ages, no acid oceans, no correlation between temperature and atmospheric CO2 and no correlation between atmospheric CO2 and sea level

This high atmospheric CO2 content was removed into sediments via living organisms and was eventually sequestered in sedimentary rocks. There has been no compelling case made for the need to reduce CO2 emissions by humans, models of future climate have overestimated the projected rate of warning and have totally ignored the possibility of global cooling. Geology and history show us that global cooling kills people and destroys ecosystems.

The Pope’s promotion of renewable energy shows that he was poorly advised. The Pope has only listened to a small group of green left environmental activists and atheists, some who are in a warm embrace with communism. Wind, solar, wave and tidal forces do not have the energy density to keep modern society alive. Construction of wind and solar industrial complexes release more CO2 than they save and are inefficient, unreliable and need back up 24/7 from coal, gas, nuclear or hydro. In order to try to make renewable energy more competitive, governments have increased the costs of conventional electricity to the point where there is fuel poverty in Western countries and employment-generating businesses are closing down or moving to countries with cheaper coal-fired electricity. The Pope’s solution to perceived problems is agrarian socialism using wind and solar power.

No Third World country trying to escape from poverty can afford renewable energy and it is only Western countries that use renewable energy because they are wealthy. Wealthy countries didn’t become wealthy overnight and centuries of the evolution of free trade, democracy, creativity, resource utilisation and property rights made wealth creation possible. Governments, collectives or international treaties did not create this wealth. Individuals created it. By denying poor countries access to fossil fuels, Pope Francis condemns them to permanent poverty with the associated disease, short life and unemployment.

The Pope seems to have swallowed hook, line and sinker the new environmental religion that competes with Catholicism. The Encyclical is an anti-development, anti-market enthusiastic embrace of global green left environmental ideology and much of the Encyclical is a denunciation of free markets dressed up as religious instruction.

Most Encyclicals are about hope whereas Laudato Si’ is actually a depressing doomsday view of the future without evidence, science and discussions about uncertainty. The Pope shows concerns for the poor yet only offers constraints that would make the poor poorer. There are no scientific references in the Encyclical even though much of it is supposedly about science and it attempts to use science to make comments about the future.

Global living standards have improved, people are wealthier, fewer people live in abject poverty and more people have access to sanitation, clean water and electricity. There is still a lot to achieve. The toll from diseases has decreased, people live longer, fewer people are killed from extreme weather events and there has been no increase in economic damage from extreme weather events.

All in all, the world is a better place. A slight increase in CO2 in the atmosphere had increased crop yields and has increased forest area and productivity. The net impact of a slight increase in atmospheric CO2 has been beneficial to the biosphere.

The Third World and the developing countries desperately need to escape from poverty. The Pope’s concern for the world’s poor will amount to nothing unless they can have safe drinking water and affordable and reliable electricity for heating and cooking. No longer should the poor die from the smoke emitted by burning dung, leaves and twigs in huts.

Only when Third World children can do homework at night using cheap coal-fired electricity can they escape from poverty. Abundant cheap electricity can be used to pump water and treat sewage. Separate reticulated water and waste water systems have saved more lives on Earth than any other invention. Cheap electricity powers civilisation and creates wealth and jobs.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

please wait...

Rating: 8.8/10 (107 votes cast)

Heaven and Hell, the Pope condemns the poor to eternal poverty, 8.8 out of 10 based on 107 ratings

137 comments to Heaven and Hell, the Pope condemns the poor to eternal poverty

I have great respect for the Pope’s sincere wishes to end pollution and poverty. We all share the same sentiments.

(a) There are plenty of people who could care less about ending pollution or poverty. To be a member of a global elite, there must be a very large number of people below you within the hierarchy of privilege, power, wealth and control. The impoverished poor are an absolute necessity to the elitist rich.

The Pope has clearly picked the side that he wants to be on.

The Pope’s promotion of renewable energy shows that he was poorly advised. The Pope has only listened to a small group of green left environmental activists and atheists, some who are in a warm embrace with communism.

Perhaps the Pope is

(a) An atheistic, green left environmental activist who has warmly embraced communism.

(b) Gullible and easily duped

The Pope seems to have swallowed hook, line and sinker the new environmental religion that competes with Catholicism.

Neo-Fascist Green Paganism is an artificial attempt to create a single world religion that is a direct threat to the existence of all other faiths. The purpose of this new religion is to provide a pervasive framework of control to assist in the production of docility and acceptance of authority amongst the general population.

The Communist Watermelons have had 65 years to polish the hype and the scam! Do not underestimate how much they have learned about controlling the attitudes of the least skilled of earthlings. The very very poor, and the very rich bankers, lawyers, academics, and politicians. All others have had to work! If a spiritual leader actually recognizes that, just how do you propose Pope Francis to appear,to those unskilled, if truly gifted? All the wise have recommended to know more about your enemy than your enemy can possibly know about either side! Keep eyes and ears open, mouth shut!! May you live in interesting times!
All the best! -will-

ExWarmist, sorry to be pedantic but I think you mean couldn’t care less in your point (a). What you have written says that they do care about ending pollution/poverty whereas I think you want to say they don’t care.

Im not religious but this Pope is the exact opposite of every Pope before him. He is a traitor to religion.
For the Pope too say “Jesus Christ failed at the cross” shows he is Satan’s puppet and not God’s servant.
Christ dying on the cross was his greatest triumph.
This guy is evil.

Another interesting but non-binding point; according to the Malachi prophesies this pope is the last pope “The Roman”.

And just to add to OriginalSteve’s comment.
Here is a quoted description of Rome from 1905. “The ear of Jubilee – Poet and pontiff. The year 1300 saw Rome crowded with enthusiastic pilgrims of all nations. The Eternal City seemed to have vindicated once more her title to be the Lady of Kingdoms, the mistress of the world…”.

Here’s what the bible says:
“Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: 17:2With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”

….. and shows that we have never lived in better times, that cheap fossil fuel energy has and is continuing to bring hundreds of millions of people from peasant poverty to the middle class …..

I’ve literally lost count of the number of times I have heard that wind and solar power are cheaper than coal fired power, just one the biggest of many fallacies in this whole renewable (non) debate.

If it is so cheap, then surely the average cost of generating electricity just must be coming down, right. I mean, if Coal fired power can generate and deliver power consistently at between $28 and $32 per MegaWattHour (MWH) then if those renewables were in fact cheaper, then the average cost would be lower than $28 to $32, now, wouldn’t it?

Okay then, look at this chart (at this link) and this is the Australian Power Regulator, the AEMO, and this is the current table of costs for this Month, October 2015.

Not one State is lower than that $28 to $32/MWH, and the State with the highest Wind Power, South Australia is considerably higher than that, the highest in Australia.

Okay then, maybe there’s an anomaly somewhere, so then let’s go way back, back to a time when there was very little, if any wind power in Australia, and keeping the same Month, look at this table of costs (at this link) from the same AEMO site for October 2000, and here, virtually all power is from coal fired sources, and you’ll notice that in those 15 years the cost of coal fired power has risen by way way way less than even inflation.

If renewables were so cheap, then why has the cost of power generation risen by so much.

When you have a huge amount of coal fired power, more than 85%, and around 2% coming from renewables of choice here, wind and solar, then their costs must be way more costly than coal fired power to increase the overall mix cost for electricity.

Now, take out you bill and see what you are being charged for electricity.

For me, it’s 24 cents per KWH. Coal fired power sells to these retailers at around (the median) of 3 cents per KWH, 12.5% of your overall electricity bill.

You are paying a much increased cost for wind power than those renewable scoffers would have you believe.

Renewable power is not cheap, and never will be.

Coal fired power always was, is, and will be cheaper than wind or solar.

Do not ever believe the ill informed hype of those who only want to shout you down.

Personally, cost is the least of my concerns.

The fact that coal fired power is regular, is constant, and available in humungous amounts from the one centralised source beats sporadic intermittent and tiny amounts from sources only there to provide their operators to endless sources of government money, the only way they can stay operational, and note here, I said stay operational and not compete, because, with a level playing field, the word compete is a joke.

Here is a trick to get to paywalled articles that sometimes works. It will allow you once only access if it works. Go to the link then copy some of the preview words for the article. Then paste those into Google. You will then often get a link to the full article you can read. This doesn’t always work but it worked for me for this article.

If you read the Australian a week or so ago Minister Hunt is quoted as saying the AGL Solar plants at Broken Hill and Nyngan were a win-win scenario. No comment to the effect they will only produce significant electricity between 10 am. and 4 pm. and not much on cloudy days, or that their projected production from fixed panels seems too high by industry standards. So Mr. and Mrs. Smith reads this and thinks we are doing a great job in converting to renewable energy and save the planet.

Let’s actually pretend that this Nyngan Solar Plant actually will generate 233,000MWH of power each year, and that’s at the modelled Capacity Factor (CF) of 26%, when in actual fact 17% would be closer to the mark, and even that will diminish over the years.

Even so at their own figure of 233,000MWH a year, and if it keeps generating at that laughable CF for its full 25 year life span, it will generate ….. IN TWENTY FIVE YEARS …. the same power actually delivered by Bayswater in, umm, 121 days.

Now, in someone’s book that’s a real bargain.

Not in my book!

It also received $166.7 million from the Federal Government and the NSW Government has provided $64.9 million, so $231.6 Million, which is around half the cost, which is, umm, never really mentioned. So, perhaps the all up cost is around $460 Million Plus.

That same lifetime power (at the inflated modelled CF) and actually supplied by Bayswater in 121 days will cost around $175 Million.

See how the construction cost was reduced by the government’s gifts to them, so that reduces the amount of money they need to recover across the life of the plant, and it is still higher than what Bayswater can supply the same power for. Bayswater already has everything included in that cost per MWH.

Now we have a work force added to this solar plant’s costs, the other maintenance, all workforce costs added, as well as the profit margin.

The maintenance costs for solar plants, and also wind (which are higher even than for solar) are way higher than for coal fired plants.

Add all these costs on and the unit cost for the electricity they sell rises even further.

If it’s so much higher than for coal fired power even with half the construction cost gifted to them, imagine a level playing field. They could never compete.

And that cost is at the inflated Capacity Factor. Less electricity, then less to recover their total costs, hence the unit cost rises even further.

Do not ever believe anybody who says renewables are cheaper than coal fired power.

And hey, imagine a Company actually proud to say they use heavy metals. (Cadmium Telluride panels)

And again, 1,350,000 individual solar modules cleaned twice a day. That must be a lot of people doing a very quick clean. Time yourself cleaning one window, and then multiply that by 1.35 million, twice a day.

Tony, are you able to throw any light on why Tasmanian prices are consistently so high when well over 90% of the state’s power is from hydro? I realise that the necessary remoteness of the power stations (because they have to be located where the water is, rather than where the power is being consumed), adds to transmission costs but this should be offset by the very low cost of the fuel(water).

Russell, in the olden days the Hydro Electric Commission (HEC) ran all things electrical. Then some bean counter somewhere decided to split it into three entities: HEC runs the dams and power stations, Transend looks after the high voltage transmission lines, and Aurora the retail sales and domestic supply. On top of this there are some longterm contracts for bulk power to industry. Considering some of the old power schemes have been running for 40-50 years, ( e.g. Poatina 1960′s) there is only some maintenance to keep them going so the answer to your question lies in high retail and administrative costs.

Keith you can be comforted that while many may not believe in God, that doesnt stop God existing.

God knows exactly where the bodies are buried, literally and figuratively…..those who committed attrocities or evil will not get away with it.

I find it interesting that the Paedo/nonce networks that have been in high society for generations are now being exposed….people are also being given the opportunity through the gay marriage thing too to show if they are on Gods side or ( often ) not.

Everything is counting down now, when you apply a Biblical lense to world events…..

Whether or not you believe in God, the Christian religion gives a good moral standard to live by. My husband’s family is atheist but they sent their kids to church and all of them have a much higher moral standard than many I see in the current society.

As far as I am concerned charity should be left to the church and governments should BUTT OUT.

…followed by Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and Australia. The U.S. is the only country to rank in the Top 10 for all three kinds of giving measured by U.K.-based charity CAF-America for the World Giving Index: Helping a stranger (No. 1), volunteering time (joint No. 5 with Tajikistan) and donating money (No. 9). Myanmar ranked No. 1 for money, No. 2 for volunteering time, but only No. 63 for helping a stranger.

Also note that charity is linked to wealth. You can not be generous when you live in abject poverty. However when the hidden goal is complete control of everyone, having all the serfs live in abject poverty is not a problem.

So we will have ‘ Social Justice’ where everyone can live a life of abject poverty except those in the bureaucracy that are running the state and sucking up any wealth that is not nailed down.

I would pre-empt what I am going to say by stating that I am an avowed atheist, and have been so since the age of 8 years old.

I regret to say that I don’t believe in the Bible, or the Koran, or the Talmud, or in any form of organised religion of any description, Abrahamic or otherwise.

I don’t discount a force beyond our understanding that guides the formation and evolution of life and the universe itself, but if that indeed exists then, IMHO, it in no way is embodied, nor is it moralistic or judgmental of human behaviour or actions. It is like entropy, it is like gravity, it is like electromagnetism-cold, inanimate, amoral, ruthless and remorseless.

That being said, I am sick to the eye teeth of the suggestion or implication that Catholicism is somehow the font of paedophilia, and that in some way there is something intrinsic in Catholicism or in the celibacy of the priesthood that leads one to become a paedophile.

Paedophiles are found in all walks of life, in all religions, including among atheists, and across every possible demographic. The only true positive association is the over-representation of males over females, for obvious reasons.

To single out Catholic priests is to give sanctuary to, and to divert attention away from, these perverts hiding in plain view in similar proportion in other areas in society, from the judiciary, to the political sphere, to the arts, wherever they may lurk. There are probably more paedophiles, I believe, hiding within the confines of the ABC or the BBC than there are in the priesthood, hence the level of their zeal to divert as much attention onto Catholic priests, and therefore away from themselves. You only have to look at the Jimmy Saville case at the BBC and the number of people who covered up for him, or Milton Okropoulos in NSW state politics as examples, and their many colleagues and associates who turned a blind eye, or even ran interference for them allowing them to continue on their merry way unfettered and undetected.

Just as there is nothing intrinsically evil about the scouting movement which had a similar “over-representation” of paedophile cases, so to the priesthood by its very nature attracts paedophiles to it rather than vice versa, because it provides a position of trust that can be exploited, and opportunities for interaction with young males beyond the prying eyes of those who might catch them out and report them.

As such, whatever one might think of Catholicism as a religion it is not the cause at all, but rather the effect of the opportunities it provides. Even though I am no friend of religion, I don’t believe in unfair scapegoating, nor in witch hunts, and I certainly do not believe in guilt by mere association.

I took a long time over my comment above, and didn’t notice your follow up comment @7.36 until after I submitted it, which as you mention did indeed qualify and reinforce much of what I ended up stating.

Churches have a very mixed history with many good and selfless works overwhelmed by much harm, either through deliberate action or unintended consequences. I admire spirituality, even though I personally prefer the rational and factual. OTOH, I fully recognise that many of the worst genocidal maniacs in history were either atheists (Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao), Satanists (Hitler and Himmler) or were otherwise non-religious.

I think this Pope has decided to be part of the New World Order based on “sustainability” as the over-riding “spiritual” force guiding each and every human endeavour, rather than be marginalised outside that clique. If so, I think he has been duped and is in for a big surprise if he thinks he and his followers are going to be embraced by those driving this particular movement. I doubt whether he fully realises that those who are advising him have set the “sustainable” human global population at 1 billion people, and what the implications might be for his “flock” as a consequence, given his Church’s “go forth and be bountiful” and anti- abortion/anti-contraception stance.

I felt that when my daughter did a Theology course recently, and they were constantly quoting Marx and Hegel as reference sources, that Christianity was in fact doomed, and I think Pope Francis has sealed Catholicism’s fate here, and in more ways than one.

I think this Pope has decided to be part of the New World Order based on “sustainability” as the over-riding “spiritual” force guiding each and every human endeavour…

When one thinks about the idea of ‘sustainability’ on wonders whether the Pope considers it equally necessary to apply it to the domains of human spirituality, morality and ethics, if only to be consistent?

Clearly pointed out previously by many here and elsewhere, dooming the poor to the rectal end of energy generation serves only to shaft them further on their mortal coil. This would seem not only morally indefensible but spiritually unsustainable, if that is, one is on the side of the angels.

The Roman Church embraced the flavour of the moment, the Eco-Church. (See Pascal Bruchner – The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings). The ability of the Roman Church to adapt and survive is legendary. No less today.

But then again, one only has to watch Religulous to understand the danger of institutionalised, Big Religion. As Bill Maher points out in the film, religion is the one thing that appears capable of justifying any act of irrationality. And as he suggested at the end of the film, it’s high time we grew-up and got over it…before it’s too late.

I’ll just point out a recent case in South Australia. A worker for SA families (state gov) was found to have molested children in his care (7 from memory) and convicted recently. This occurred while the Royal Commission into abuse in institutions was under way. Complaints to the government department were ignored and he had actual failed the testing for suitability to work with children. He was only caught because he organised a child porn site on the internet that was noticed by other police agencies.

While I would like the RC Church to do better than a government department, don’t kid yourself that this is just a church issue and not a much larger problem in the community. A greater percentage of Labor MPs have been convicted o child abuse than priests.

The more I hear about the Green faith from all circles, the more difficult I find it to throw away this suspicion that all sectors are in it for ultimate control of liberty and the like. I’m convinced that this pope yearns for the good old days of the Inquisition and such, where the church ruled supreme; so best to get in on the ground floor, rather than be left behind, or left with scraps.

The progressive, statist, corporatist, globalist green mafia have an overwhelming lust for unaccountable power and control over the only renewable resource – Humanity.

Fear, Deception, Greed, Ignorance, Apathy, & Violence are all tools used by these people to acquire, maintain and execute unaccountable power and control.

This has been going on for a very long time.

The big problem that people of this type have is with Post Renaissance culture and the shift away from Human Authority, propagandized as “The Authority of God/Divine right to Rule” to the authority of evidence and reason bulwarked by freedom of expression and association.

The movement against the authority of evidence/reason and liberty of expression & association has been taking setbacks since the 1600s, but has been gaining some ground over the last 100 years or so.

“Heaven on Earth sold plenty of copies and can be found on many Coalition MPs’ bookshelves.”

Some critique. Attack the man. Make out he is a right wing extremist. There is no clearer proof that Global Warming is fake than the fact that it is so perfectly aligned politically. Labor/Green believe in Global warming. No one else does. Surely sceptics should be on both sides? Believers on both sides? No, Coalition MPs are all sceptics. Of course. The idea that people can think for themselves is a foreign concept to Greens.

Really, why would all the true believers be on the extreme left of politics if it was not an anti capitalistic, anti democratic, anti establishment, anti Western idea? This is flipped by arguing the reverse, that daring to disagree with man made Global Warming is simply right wing policy, implying that Plimer is simply a paid political activist working for big rocks. However the Coalition does not have a man made Global Warming policy. It is not against anything. There is simply no problem and certainly no policy and platform. It is simply not the ‘greatest moral dilemma in a generation’, even if it were true.

It is also amazing to me that people who believe so strongly in man made global warming, who insist it is true, do not bother to read Plimer’s book. Probably because even simple real science and facts are beyond them and because it is really all about the politics. That is why there is never a real science debate. There is simply no connection between CO2 and the non existent warming, but only a sceptic would say that apparently, a heretic, a non believer, a person who actually wants to see proof, a right wing extremist then.

It is a basic premise of Green/Left/Fascist/Marxist/Authoritarian/Totalitarian thought that the average human being is too dim to think for themselves and should not be allowed to think for themselves lest they hurt themselves or others.

The real subtext of this premise is that Humans are smart enough to work out that they are being scammed if they are allowed to think about it – hence they must not be allowed to think for themselves lest they work out that the Green/Left/Fascist/Marxist/Authoritarian/Totalitarians that own them and are consuming the value of their labour and providing nothing in return.

I.e. People can not be allowed to work out how their lives are parasitised by Green/Left/Fascist/Marxist/Authoritarian/Totalitarians whose only interest is to maximize revenue from the productive, but lowly, members of society to feather their own nests and to provide a very comfortable and unaccountable life for themselves and their own families at every one elses expense.

Ex,
Please remember that after 65 years the very young are very old!! Gettm young! this works well for both religions and Watermelons! What are you, not up to others, doing to correct that? Some have tried war, but that doesn’t work either!
Have you a suggestion?

And I wish that the sheeple knew that the anthropogenic load of CO2 in the atmosphere was less than 3.5%. An insignificant proportion of what is a trace gas. Of course, extra CO2 is a benefit, not a problem in any case.

I see this review is by one Ian McHugh “Climate academic”. Is it this Ian McHugh? Science fiction and fantasy writer.Couldn’t be could it? The only other one I see is a young research assistant in the Geography Dept.at Monash. This has made my day
Apologies to both if I have it wrong.

ATM1020 – The science of climate. SynopsisClimate change is an area of modern science with a very high public profile and important implications for people, society and environment. This unit examines natural climate variability, human-induced climate change, and the controversies surrounding our effect on climate.

This is what passes for science at Monash. Indoctrination in political science at first year? Why not teach them real science? This is a course to train activists. What sort of job does a climate activist get? Then university is not about jobs, is it? No wonder Lomborg was not welcome. His very existence questions the value of these ‘science’ degrees.

How do they teach science in the Arts department, or is this the new view of Climate Science?

About us

In July 2014, the new School of Earth, Atmosphere and Environment was formed, bringing together the former School of Geosciences (Faculty of Science), atmospheric science (School of Mathematics) and physical geography (Faculty of Arts).

It creates a critical mass, an Australian powerhouse of Earth sciences education and research.

So it’s sort of arts/geography/maths/atmosphere/creative writing. Courses for our times. You too can be a scientist without all that nasty rigorous evidence based science. Like zoology and botany except people listen to you and you can write articles for the Age.

Interesting that Jo already has 85 comments in about ten hours while CRIKEY only got 19 comments in the entire time the comment period was open.

As was mentioned by Lomborg, a u n survey showed CAGW ranked 16th out of 16. People are just plai tired of all the hype and doom and gloom. After forty years it is now a big YAWN. Realists are concerned because we see it as the huge political wedge that it is.

There is no doubt that CO2 at current levels is good for us (as Prof Farquhar acknowledges from a plant perspective) and we could certainly benefit by a lot more in the atmosphere. I especially like the evidence from Japan’s IBUKI satellite and the USA’s OCO2 satellite that indicates that on an annual basis Australia is a net CO2 sink. If we must shortly genuflect to the high priests of the IPCC in Paris, why wouldn’t we ram that inconvenient truth down their cake hole first? After all we will soon be paying landholders for “avoided deforestation” via the next (November?) auction for Carbon Abatement Contracts. It is not a big stretch to claim that we have instigated such “avoided deforestation” throughout Australia as a consequence of most States’ draconian land clearing restraints. Ipso facto this country absorbs more CO2 than it emits (even under Kyoto rules), so ‘p— off hairy legs’.

Actually I do not have any problems with the above scenario, but it needs to be challenged from an ecologist’s perspective. To really benefit from the CO2 fertilisation effect you need more trees rather than more grass. This is because trees can grow for most of the year (minimal temperature constraints in this country) and via their deeper root system they have access to much more water and nutrients than grassland. [It is just a matter of correctly identifying the elephant in the room. Or as the late Bob Lange would pronounce “I have students who can describe the curb and the snaffle with exactitude, but no one can find the bloody horse”!].

Fortunately, throughout our ‘intact’ (not cleared by humans) woodlands and forests there is now strong evidence of woody plant thickening – which most researchers attribute to a lower fire frequency prevailing under management by Europeans cf. indigenous practices. I contend that it is this woody plant thickening that has been the essential precursor to our vegetation now taking full advantage of the extra CO2 pulse in the atmosphere. We are a net sink (to the extent we are) because past management changes gave us the base to maximise our CO2 uptake. What makes me so sure? Well if you travel virtually anywhere in Australia’s pastoral lands you will come across classic ‘fence line contrasts’ where trees and shrubs will abound on one side of a fence, with native grassland (not previously cleared of woody vegetation) on the other. This is mostly a result of management effects. Both sides of the fence usually have the same soil, rainfall and atmospheric CO2 levels to draw upon. The same management effects occur in our woodlands and forests but you don’t have the fence line contrast to highlight them.

The pope should stick to sharing Jesus’ gospel with people in the knowledge that God’s Holy Spirit will lead people to Christ for salvation by grace. Unfortunately, perhaps naiively, the pope seems to promote salvation by works. Works such as man – made, God grieving, mendacious scientific endeavour to stave off climate change whilst lining the pockets of the warmist preachers with filthy lucre. The apostle Paul’s letter to Titus, chapter 1, verse 11 sums it up thus: “They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach–and that for the sake of dishonest gain.”

In catholicism there is the concept of virtue in poverty. In some of their religious groups the members take a vow of poverty. It’s easier for a poor man to attain heaven than a rich man, etc. So perhaps the pope, et al heading up the Catholic church aren’t real keen on lifting the world’s poor out of poverty; not a top priority.

Here’s a question for anyone to answer. I just made this comment at Jennifer Marohasy’s blog.
In the book “Taxing Air” the authors tell us that the IPCC prefers the Had 4 temp data. I’ve tried this before, but can anyone tell me why the alarmists get a free pass trumpeting their so called CAGW? Here’s the 3 warming trends used by Phil Jones in the 2010 BBC interview, but I’ve extended the 1910 to 1940 trend to 1945. That’s 36 years (inclusive), so the 2 early trends shown here are 1860 to 1880 and 1910 to 1945. Both are clearly before the 1950 impact from human co2 emissions.
The later warming trend is from 1975 to 1998 and should be impacted by extra co2 emissions. Please can anyone tell me the difference in the last warming trend? It looks very similar to me and Jones agreed that there was no SS difference during the interview.

I’d be interested to know what the 1.2 billion Catholics globally think of their leaders direction of thinking, over 40% are in Latin America with their economy starting to recede there’s already 28% of the population in poverty (less than $4 a day)

Sorry continued: according to this article in The Economist things are looking grim for an already vulnerable people, regardless of beliefs anyone who has a position of authority with a job description of world welfare officer should not be advocating the regression of life saving technology.

16 Jul 2015 — 13,501 cases of pneumonia in children under five, with 117 deaths

11 Jul 2015 — Heaviest snowfall in years kills 171,850 alpacas

****
7 May 2014 — Peru facing harshest winter in a decade according to the regional chief of the National Meteorological and Hydrological Service. Residents warned to be careful in the extreme temperatures.

“The last Pope that stuck his nose into science declared the Earth was the center of the Universe , was flat and the Sun was in orbit around the Earth !”

Sigh. Please go do some research and get your history straight. Pope Urban VIII was not the only person in the world who believed in the geocentric model of the universe. Nobody at that time believed that the earth was flat. And Galileo’s heliocentric model was just as WRONG as the geocentric one, so he couldn’t prove it anyway.

I’ve been retired 15 years now and watch world developments in wonder.
Many years ago, over 40 years ago I think, I was on a contract to upgrade the computer system at a research laboratory where they bred white rats. I learned that rats do not like being overcrowded. When population levels become too high the rats start attacking each other.
Anyone noticed this effect among the human population?

hoping for some feedback from TonyfromOz once I post a second comment with more details:

23 Oct: Brisbane Times: AAP: Greens want Queensland to back solar carparks in shopping centres
A renewable energy developer who wants to roll out solar carports at shopping centres across Queensland says he isn’t trying to take on the mining industry.
Shakra Energy’s managing director Sam Khalil joined Greens senators Sarah Hanson-Young and Larissa Waters to unveil Australia’s “largest carport solar development” in Brisbane on Friday.
“We’re not trying to take on the mining industry on – we’re only trying to generate 20 to 30 to 40 per cent of what high energy users need (and) reduce the carbon emissions,” he told AAP.
“We’re not here to say let’s go head to head. We’re here to say – allow us to generate cleaner electricity, 20-30 per cent of the energy needed, more jobs and look past your nose.”…
The total cost was about $250,000, although this would vary from project to project, Mr Khalil said…
Mr Khalil said he had some positive responses from state and federal politicians but others were more interested in the coal seam gas industry.
“They’re probably looking at the contracts that are probably already tied up with those large fat cats, which is quite sad because, as you can see, the agriculture industry is suffering,” he said…
Greens Larissa Waters: “While coal is in structural decline, renewable energy is on the up and up, generating new jobs and offering trade opportunities,” she said…http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/greens-want-queensland-to-back-solar-carparks-in-shopping-centres-20151023-gkh0z0.html

22 Oct: Brisbane Times: Are these solar panels the setting of the sun for coal mines?
Solar energy systems on top of shopping centres, car park shade covers, hospitals, airports and other commercial buildings are the beginning of the end for large scale coal power stations, one alternative energy developer will explain on Friday.
Shakra Energy managing director Sam Khalil will on Friday outline how the solar energy system his company has installed as a “shade cover” over carparking at Buranda is now doubling as a solar energy generator. He says the system cut energy costs for the owner by between 30 to 40 per cent…
Shakra Energy now has had to place $15,000 “grid protection relays” in place to prevent solar energy being “exported” to other big users because of strict energy controls.
“What those grid protection relays do is stop any export on the line, because the Energex, the AGLs and big power networks in the world, they recognise that if commercial solar gets momentum, they are going to have a surplus of electricity on their lines,” he said.
“So can you imagine three or four 100 kilowatt systems sprawled over every manufacturer, abattoir and they are exporting that electricity.
“It is really going to disrupt the lines. They (governments and energy authorities) are going to have to do something about this, because it is mind-boggling.”…
Mr Khalil says their Buranda plant was the first commercial solar production facility in Queensland, outside a similar scheme on the rooftop at one building of the University of Queensland…
Greens Larissa Waters: “The Palaszczuk Government needs to hurry up and implement the 50 per cent renewable energy target it promised in the election, instead of pushing ahead with coal exports through the Great Barrier Reef,” she said.http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/are-these-solar-panels-the-setting-of-the-sun-for-coal-mines-20151022-gkg8nc.html

in January, Sam Khalil was apparently head of operations and business development for ET Solar Australia (Chinese company?)

21 Jan: SMH: Peter Hannam: Solar industry gets $33.3m boost to fuel commercial take-up
The Clean Energy Finance Corp, which the Abbott government has been seeking to axe, will provide as much as $20 million to the venture with ET Solar to encourage more shopping centres and other big power users to cut their power bills…
Under the program, ET Solar will own, operate and maintain solar PV systems ranging from 30 kilowatts to 2 megawatts in size, with the customer agreeing to buy the electricity at an agreed rate below the current power price…
“Our first PV systems installed through this program will involve large-scale commercial projects in Queensland, the Northern Territory, South Australia and New South Wales, with a rollout to all states around Australia,” Sam Khalil, head of operations and business development for ET Solar Australia, said.
“We currently have a commercial-scale car port structure solar project under way in Queensland, which will incorporate solar energy into a shopping centre car park, with similar construction planned in other states,” Mr Khalil said.
ET Solar, a top-tier maker of PV panels based in Nanjing, China, will provide $13.3 million in equity for the venture.http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/solar-industry-gets-333m-boost-to-fuel-commercial-takeup-20150120-12ulv9.html

or is it a German company?

22 Jan: Business Spectator: John Conroy: CEFC lends $20m for commercial solar boost
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) is set to provide up to $20 million to global energy solutions provider ET Solar to accelerate the take-up of solar PV in the large commercial sector.
German-based ET Solar Energy established its Australia subsidiary earlier this year to focus on commercial-scale and utility-scale projects development and investment for the Pacific region…
“As a Tier 1 solar company with a strong Research and Development Team based in Germany, ET Solar ensures the highest standard of PV systems, and we will be using top quality local distributors and accredited installers to deliver solutions for all types of businesses in Australia,” he said.
Sam Khalil, Head of Operations and Business Development for ET Solar Australia said…
Under the CEFC financed program, ET Solar will own, operate and maintain a customer’s solar PV system – varied to suit their energy requirements with system sizes ranging between 30KW and 2MW – and the customer agrees to purchase electricity at an agreed rate, which is lower than current electricity costs.
ET Solar will provide up to $13.3 million in equity, while the CEFC is providing up to $20 million in senior debt finance towards the program.http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2015/1/22/solar-energy/cefc-lends-20m-commercial-solar-boost

the Shakra Energy company mentioned in the Brisbane Times’ articles from yesterday and today:

Shakra Energy
An Australian owned and operated company utilizing a network of global and national partnerships delivering world class Solar Engineering developments both in Australia and abroad.
Successfully completed 100KW Commercial Solar Carport Structure Project -BRISBANE
Successfully completed 100KW Commercial Solar Roof Top Structure Project -Canberra
Sam Khalil, Managing Director
Sam brings more than 20years experience in innovative delivery in the areas of property development together with commercial Solar energy. Sam specialize in the development and project management Of roof top, commercial and utility solar system. He has represented Multi National form China & Germany and managed projects across Australia.http://shakraenergy.com/

Perhaps His Holiness has thought it through, and he knows which side will deliver lots more little believers. Secularity and education, over the last 200 years at least, have gone hand in hand. The less education a population has, the closer they cleave to his church and its teachings.

Maybe His Holiness is actually right. If we can free ourselves from the paradigm that poverty is evil, we may learn to understand that poverty actually releases a person from the bonds of materialism. Think about the incessant mental anguish that us poor materialists/consumers have to endure in deciding which smart phone or other gadget to buy next.

If we wind back the clock to before the industrial revolution. The average lifespan was only 47 years. So perhaps that is the best way – just get 47 years in the “vale of tears” before the eternal “reward in heaven”.

With all due respect, who would you expect his Holiness to believe on this issue – the virtual unanimity of the relevant scientific community, or a small group of radicalised, contrarian fringe-dwellers?

In a refreshingly powerful and direct statement, Venezuela’s bishops Monday blamed “Marxist socialism” and “communism” by name for the horrors and chaos gripping their country, according to a story in El Universal.

The bishops said the long lines of people trying to buy food and other basic necessities and the constant rise in prices are the result of the government’s decision to “impose a political-economic system of socialist, Marxist or communist,” which is “totalitarian and centralist” and “undermines the freedom and rights of individuals and associations.”

The Venezuelan bishops specifically stated that the private sector was critical for the well being of the country. The document, read by Monsignor Diego Padron in Spanish, said the country needs “a new entrepreneurial spirit with audacity and creativity.”

So not only did these bishops diagnose the cause of the misery correctly; they also warned that communism harms the poor most of all….

The Venezuelan archbishops make the useful observation that if capitalist economies have problems, socialist alternatives are far worse for the poor and needy. Could it be the pope’s Latin American colleagues on the ground in the cesspool of communism are the ones who can get through to the holy father on economics?…

forgot to say I am looking forward to reading Ian Plimer’s new book. no doubt it will be featured on all those ABC book programs!

meanwhile, talk about the MSM’s love affair with our PM:

23 Oct: Guardian: ‘One of the interesting things about being PM is people take more notice of you’
Malcolm Turnbull on the economy and emissions, boats and Borgen. In the Guardian Australia interview with Lenore Taylor and Katharine Murphy
Q: On climate policy you’ve said the important thing is to get emission reductions and that there are lots of ways to get there. Greg Hunt says the safeguard mechanism will achieve around 200m tonnes of the abatement you need to achieve your 2030 target. At the moment the safeguards mechanism is explicitly designed to stop rogue emitters going crazy. Surely that means you are going to have to change it when you do your review in 2017 or maybe sooner, and if that’s the case why not say so now?
A:Well, we’ll review the policy in 2017 and if changes need to be made to meet the emission cuts we have promised, then changes will be made.
Q: But we know changes need to be made …
A: You say you do.
Q: But your policy says quite explicitly this safeguard mechanism is not designed to force anyone to reduce their emissions and on the other hand your minister says that policy will achieve 200m of emission reductions, it’s not me saying it, it’s a discrepancy in your own policy.
A: Well, Lenore, I hate to be unhelpful, but the work that has been done by Greg, that I have been through with him, has certainly persuaded me, that on the assumptions that he has got, we will meet that 26% to 28% cut in emissions. Now, if it turns out we are not able to do that then we are going to have to make changes and that is the purpose of the 2017 review.
Q: Just to try one more time, I am not questioning the assumptions he is making, I am questioning why he is assuming part of the policy will do something it doesn’t currently appear to be designed to do.
A: Well I just can’t agree with you on that contention. If you want to drill into the details of Greg’s policy, obviously take it up with him, but it is very clear we have to deliver our commitment.
Q: And go beyond that probably?
A:Sure, one assumes, arguably, that depends on the rest of the world. If we get a global commitment, then Australia and Australians will expect us to live up to them.
Q: And you’ll go to Paris?
A:That is my intention. I’ll go to CHOGM [the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Malta] and then I’ll go to Paris [for the UN climate change conference]…http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/oct/23/turnbull-being-pm–people-take-more-notice-of-you

Bolt Blog: Turnbull grants favor to Abbott haters
Malcolm Turnbull gives his first major newspaper interview to two Fairfax reporters – both confirmed Tony Abbott haters. One, for instance, falsely claimed Abbott had snubbed the gay partner of an Ambassador in a “possibly homophobic” moment. (Now who leaked that?) The other praises Turnbull for what he damned in Abbott.
Rewarded.

links to the following, complete with a ludicrous video by Peter Hartcher, trying to look suitably serious, as he explains the interview with the PM!

23 Oct: Age: Peter Hartcher: For Malcolm Turnbull the reformer, being Prime Minister is just the start
PHOTO CAPTION: Malcolm Turnbull in his Prime Ministerial suite at Parliament House in Canberra on Friday
Malcolm Turnbull’s ambitiousness is remarkable. Taking the prime ministership, it turns out, was just the beginning…
Most profoundly, he wants to change the culture; the culture of government, the culture of politics, the culture of business. Even the way Australia presents itself to the world.
He cites the founder of modern China, Mao Zedong, in a famous declaration attributed to him in the creation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 when he said: “The Chinese people have stood up!” And Turnbull adapts it for Australia: “Modern China is built upon an assertion of national sovereignty. And that is why we say to China, ‘The Australian people stand up!”‘ repeating it in Mandarin…http://www.theage.com.au/comment/peter-hartcher-for-malcolm-turnbull-the-reformer-being-prime-minister-is-just-the-start-20151023-gkha44

worth going to Bolt’s blog to see this front-page:

Bolt Blog: But they didn’t forget the bull
Two sad things about this front-page ad in the Financial Review today.
First, of course, is the atrocious spelling mistake, not picked up by any sub editors.
But second is the boosterism. Turnbull has been in office for just a month and done almost nothing that is his own work. Yet he’s already being measured up for greatness?

Not exactly,
We should lobby to ensure that MT doesn’t win his seat, then vote below th line in the senate, assuring that you vote for a conservative independent. Maybe even the ALA (even though they have a communist structure). MT needs to have a conservative led senate not in his control to keep him honest. Look into Nationals aligned senators, find out their attitudes to climate change.

Some good articles here on the carbon uptake of trees, but claimed gras pastures did not do the same because they are annuals as a retired farmer I disput this as with good farm practice with the latist plant technology we could achieve 12 ton to acre dry mater on Annual pasture not shore that trees do better than that

The IPCC has never been about the science of climate. Why should a Pope dispute the official science of most world Govts? Indeed what insights can the Vatican have that is not available to the US or other major Govts?

The West aims to exert control via the UN and the World Bank. The UN receives tithes on CO2 taxes. The World Bank has asked for US$89 trillion (about 75 times Oz GDP). A lot can be bought with such money – particularly Govts and NGOs.

The Pope simply sees vast tracts of money which will be disbursed, however inefficiently, to poorer nations. The Vatican, no doubt, would be part of that money flow. It would be a foolish Pope who chose not to become part of that disbursement as there can be no doubt that it involves a transfer from rich to poor nations which would fulfill his stated charter of helping the poor.

I have often wondered what compels bright people like Pres. Obama to foster this cause as surely he is aware of the patent shortcomings and lack of science. To paraphrase Feynman, the basis of science is the ability to predict the outcome of an experiment which has never been done. If the predictions fail the conjecture is wrong. CAGW is such a failure.

There are a multitude of motives for pushing this conjecture but making money personally is not Obama’s aim. So, I form the idea that this is part of a strategy of China “containment” or at least compliance under the guidance of a quasi ‘world Govt.’ Bear in mind that China is a huge, formidable and strengthening opponent and that any real confrontation would likely result in nuclear war. People who are not convinced should remember that the US has used nuclear weapons and was prepared to use them in the Korean war when it looked like it would lose.

If the bulk of countries are dependent on the UN and the World Bank there is a lot of power that the US and allies can exert via this route. Perhaps it is the most peaceful route helping explain why Obama agreed to hand over some US300 billion to China with very little promised in return.

This is the perfect thread to demonstrate what life in the early Renaissance was really like. This article, called Ponenta, was written 16th June 1905 but obviously references earlier works.

The year 1300 saw Rome crowded with enthusiastic pilgrims of all nations.

The Eternal City seemed to have vindicated once more her title to be the “Lady of Kingdoms”, the mistress of the world; her claim to that supreme homage, reference, awe, which could draw one who owed her but little personal love to worship the very stones of her walls, the very ground on which she stood.

True, her ancient splendors are half buried in the (?) of successive barbarian sieges, her miles of marble palaces and temples long since converted into quarry for the builders of grim medieval fortress-homes. True, her once-frequented public baths – the sign and pledge of something more than a high standard of mere physical cleanliness – are forgotten as through they had never been, since the Goths (germans) of the sixth century cut the great aqueducts; the luxurious cleanliness of classical and early Christian days is replaced by a characteristic medieval inheritance of picturesque squalor and dirt. True, again her august municipal organization – parent of countless thriving polities throughout the length of Italy – is reduced to the barest shadow of a name, is caricatured in the interminable faction-fights of the Colonna, the Orsini, and the other “senatorial” families, recalling, but in a more savage, medieval guise, the old street battles of the days of Cicero, Clodius and Milo; but with this difference, that whereas the Clodian faction-fights had been but an occasional feature of life of ancient Rome, in the Rome of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries such tumults are the dominant characteristic. The city which of all others claimed to the House of God on earth has become a veritable group of robbers’ dens, the daily battlefield of the fierce “noble families”.

The fact that Red Thum troll has disliked every post shows how desperate warmists are becoming on the lead up to Paris (which incidentally also coincides with the other thing – the civilisation destroying invasion of Europe currently under way).

The fact that Red Thum troll has disliked every post shows how desperate warmists are becoming desperate…

Or it’s simply demonstrating someone’s immaturity. I’ve often thought that this disapproval of all comments syndrome comes from someone who is simply angry that not everyone in the world agrees with their favorite dogma. There may be no desperation behind it at all, just an immaturity that doesn’t allow their bothering to comment and state why they disagree.